While meeting with NATO leaders in Brussels, American Secretary of Defense James Mattis once again called on member nations to fulfill their financial obligations to the alliance, warning that a failure to do so could result in America shifting its level of commitment to the organization.

“I owe it to you all to give you clarity on the political reality in the United States, and to state the fair demand from my country’s people in concrete terms,” Mattis said.

“America will meet its responsibilities, but if your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to the alliance, each of your capitals needs to show its support for our common defense.”

NATO is composed of twenty-eight member nations, each of which is obligated by its charter to devote two percent of their gross domestic product to defense spending. However, only five of the twenty-eight have been meeting those requirements, with the United States footing the overwhelming majority of the bill. Presidents Obama and Trump have both made critical statements regarding NATO members failing to meet this obligation in the past, but concerns were heightened when Trump suggested that the United States’ commitment to NATO may waiver under his administration if other nations don’t start taking their parts of the deal more seriously.

“No longer can the American taxpayer carry a disproportionate share of the defense of western values,” Mattis said. “Americans cannot care more for your children’s security than you do. Disregard for military readiness demonstrates a lack of respect for ourselves, for the alliance, and for the freedoms we inherited, which are now clearly threatened.”

One would think that NATO member-states would have plenty of motivation to reach their spending goals, as concerns about Russian aggression have plagued the organization since Russia’s military annexation of Crimea in 2014.

The United States has demonstrated a continued commitment to the alliance as recently as last month, when thousands more American troops arrived in various NATO nations bordering Russia to bolster defenses as a part of the NATO operation Atlantic Resolve. American Marines were also recently deployed to Norway on six month rotations for joint training operations. While these operations are officially not related to Europe’s concerns about Russia, it’s clear that an expanded American presence in the region is the result of Crimea’s annexation.

The only five nations currently living up to their end of the NATO bargain are the United States, Greece, the United Kingdom, Estonia and Poland. No other nation within the organization has reached the two percent mark, despite some enjoying strong economies that could easily support it. Countries like France, Turkey, Germany, Italy and Canada have all failed to reach the two percent mark mandated by the treaty.

Despite pressuring NATO members to meet their spending requirements, Mattis reaffirmed American commitment to the alliance, calling it his “second home,” in reference to his time-serving as the Supreme Allied Commander for Transformation within the organization.

“It’s a fair demand that all who benefit from the best defense in the world carry their proportionate share of the necessary cost to defend freedom,” Mattis said. “It is ultimately freedom we defend at NATO. I do have confidence that we will prove once again that we can react to the changing circumstances.”

Editorial cartoon courtesy of Robert L. Lang

We thought this story would be interesting for you, for full access to premium original stories written by our all veteran journalists subscribe here .

About the Author

Alex Hollings
Alex Hollings served as an active duty Marine for six and a half years before being medically retired from service. As an athlete, Hollings has raced exotic cars, played Marine Corps football and college rugby, fought in cages, and even wrestled alligators. As a scholar, he has earned a master’s degree in Communications from Southern New Hampshire University, as well as undergraduate degrees in Corporate and Organizational Communications and Business Management.

Comments

To comment on this article please join/login.
Here's a sample of the comments on this post.

Susan H

YP, in amongst all that awesome history and commentary, you made me laugh with a few of your brilliant little observations!

Yankee Papa

.
...I was in Germany 1953-55 (service brat...) German middle aged woman ran a Gasthaus (Inn, bar, restaurant...). She was fond of my family, but indicated that she and most Germans did not like any of the occupiers. Only people at the time making noise about that, marxist element in West Germany... and they mostly carried signs.
...As to not more noise: "...We dislike Americans, we hate the British and we loathe the French... ... ... but we fear the Russians..."
.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d898e093099dd89913863db58c44ab9f4bfa5c62311c427767f03ee1c71d8e1d.jpg
(Berlin, 1945)
-Yankee Papa-

Leo W.

Rice may have said that, but the quote did not originate with her. It was first quoted by the first NATO Secretary General, Hastings Ismay.
"NATO is to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down."

FoCar

What's the point? NATO benefits the US in a lot of ways - even with most members failing to meet defense spending targets.
We also are not footing the bill on their defense. Here's a good write up by a retired Delta operator:
http://bradtaylorbooks.com/2017/01/fast-facts-nato/

Yankee Papa

.
...Not exactly. Finland was in fact invaded by the Soviet Union who took a large chunk of the country... including the most defensible approaches and their Arctic coastline including a year round port. The Finns lost 3% of their population... mostly military age men. Small country... in terms of impact... would be like the U.S. today losing three million members of the armed forces in a five year period.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f20bbe3742692d1e8b37a5e72bb611eb9d3480ae377b1d462f2b4fb9b29bf8c9.jpg
...In the "Winter War" the Finns put on the best show "since Achilles slew Hector", but their defenses ultimately collapsed and absolutely nothing stopping Stalin from taking the whole lash-up. But "for the moment" he was content to digest the Arctic coast, the islands and corridor on the approaches to Leningrad... and the formerly all Finn border province in the South.
...The Finns decided to get back what was formerly theirs. When Germany invaded the USSR the Finns waited some days, then declared war. But the Finnish Army itself refused to advance any further than their former borders. Hitler frothed at the mouth about this, but Finland stood firm. At the end of the day they were not Germany's "ally" (and certainly not "puppet") but rather a "co-belligerent..." (The U.S. is currently a "co-belligerent" with Syria and Russia against ISIS... but is otherwise in no sense an "ally...")
...The Western allies recognized Finland's situation. The U.K. only made a token declaration of war... (one single bombing raid targeted to miss anything or anybody as a gesture...) The U.S. retained diplomatic relations with Finland right through the war.
...The Soviets by 1944 were again in a position to take all of Finland... and the Finn's could not have stopped it... and there was nobody in the world community to raise a hand to stop it... The Soviets told the Finns to kick any German troops out of the country or be swallowed up by the Red Army. The Finnish Army tried to give the Germans a "head start" both to avoid appearing "treacherous" and to avoid losses in lives and property.
...Unfortunately, the new German commander was a fanatic and in his slow retreat to Norway acted like a more savage version of Sherman's March to the Sea... The Finn's fought a dreadful campaign to force them out.
...The Soviets immediately took what they wanted... starting with everything that the Finn's took back in the "Continuation War..." Stalin had consumed more than he could comfortably digest... from Manchuria to Berlin (and in Western parts of the pre 1941 Soviet Union he had guerrilla wars going that would last into the 1950s...) "For the moment" Finland could serve as a "buffer state" against Norway and Sweden.
...In the meantime, Finland would be hit with savage "reparations"... A country mostly involved in logging and fishing had to build new industries just to be able to deal with reparations. But the Finns knuckled down and cleared up the reparations... and still had the industries...
...Finland was prohibited from any military or political alliances with Western countries. A new term was created... To "Finlandize", meaning to not occupy a country but to leave it unable to look to others for help in its defense.
...In 1939 Finland was caught between a rock and a hard place. To refuse Soviet demands was to face a massive Soviet invasion Mannerheim, the brilliant Finnish field marshal told the Finnish government that... but they simply refused to believe him... they were convinced that Stalin was bluffing, and that the West would stop him if he tried.
...To give in to the demands as Latvia had, might well result in a "quiet" Soviet occupation. And among the initial demands... Finland's only realistic fortifications.
...The Finnish government proudly gutted its military during the 1930s and gaily refused to prepare for war. To refuse to prepare for war... and then to engage in it... is stupidity of such a degree that it can only be called criminal. Once war was engaged, Mannerheim, in effect, led Finland all through the three stages of WW2. He placed Finland in the best position possible... but in the end, Stalin got to make the call.
...Finland has kept conscription and has (for its size) a very well trained army... though still made up (like Israel's) mostly of reservists.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f8c2699e16a9e43c04a1d037a6a08820297901ee124e5469b875287675407894.jpg
...They would only be a "speed bump" to a Russian invasion... but in a move towards Sweden and/or Norway the Russians can not afford even a speed bump... and Finland (as the Soviets found out in 1939) not amenable to "Blitzkrieg" tactics...
...Sweden also does not belong to NATO, but unlike Finland tossed out conscription once the Soviet Union collapsed. They at one time secretly had nuclear weapons... but quietly dismantled their production facility and handed their nukes to the U.S. Now Russian submarines are again intruding in their waters and Russian aircraft "pushing" against their borders. Sweden is behaving like a "deer caught in the headlights" and is slow to adjust to the reality that security may come at some cost to their precious welfare state...
...The possibility exists that Sweden and Finland might apply to join NATO. Unlike some other countries who are applying, they are democratic, stable, and not corrupt. Of course, the Russians might go ape... which is why what is most likely is Sweden and Finland quietly "coordinating" with NATO under the table.
-Yankee Papa-